Vivek Ramaswamy

It means in some deeper perverse sense, you work for them because you're responsible for what they do without any authority to actually change it. So I think most people who have traveled in Japan and Japanese corporate culture through the 1990s and 2000s and 2010s and maybe even some vestiges in the 2020s wouldn't really dispute what I just told you.

Now, we're bringing back to the more contentious terrain. I think that's basically how things have worked in the executive branch of the federal government of the United States of America. You have these so-called civil service protections on the books.

Now, we're bringing back to the more contentious terrain. I think that's basically how things have worked in the executive branch of the federal government of the United States of America. You have these so-called civil service protections on the books.

Now, we're bringing back to the more contentious terrain. I think that's basically how things have worked in the executive branch of the federal government of the United States of America. You have these so-called civil service protections on the books.

Now, if you really read them carefully, I think that there are areas to provide daylight for a truly constitutionally well-trained president to act. But apart from those, that's a contrarian view that I have that bucks conventional wisdom. But apart from that caveat, in general, the conventional view has been the U.S. president can't fire these people.

Now, if you really read them carefully, I think that there are areas to provide daylight for a truly constitutionally well-trained president to act. But apart from those, that's a contrarian view that I have that bucks conventional wisdom. But apart from that caveat, in general, the conventional view has been the U.S. president can't fire these people.

Now, if you really read them carefully, I think that there are areas to provide daylight for a truly constitutionally well-trained president to act. But apart from those, that's a contrarian view that I have that bucks conventional wisdom. But apart from that caveat, in general, the conventional view has been the U.S. president can't fire these people.

There's 4 million federal bureaucrats, 99.9% of them can't be touched by the person who the people who elected to run the executive branch can't even fire those people. It's like the equivalent of that Japanese CEO. And so that culture exists every bit as much in the federal bureaucracy of the United States of America as it did in Japanese corporate culture through the 1990s.

There's 4 million federal bureaucrats, 99.9% of them can't be touched by the person who the people who elected to run the executive branch can't even fire those people. It's like the equivalent of that Japanese CEO. And so that culture exists every bit as much in the federal bureaucracy of the United States of America as it did in Japanese corporate culture through the 1990s.

There's 4 million federal bureaucrats, 99.9% of them can't be touched by the person who the people who elected to run the executive branch can't even fire those people. It's like the equivalent of that Japanese CEO. And so that culture exists every bit as much in the federal bureaucracy of the United States of America as it did in Japanese corporate culture through the 1990s.

And that's a lot of what's wrong with not just the way that our Department of Defense is run and our foreign policy establishment is run, but I think it applies to a lot of the domestic policy establishment as well. And to come back to the core point, how are we going to save this republic? This is the debate in the conservative movement right now.

And that's a lot of what's wrong with not just the way that our Department of Defense is run and our foreign policy establishment is run, but I think it applies to a lot of the domestic policy establishment as well. And to come back to the core point, how are we going to save this republic? This is the debate in the conservative movement right now.

And that's a lot of what's wrong with not just the way that our Department of Defense is run and our foreign policy establishment is run, but I think it applies to a lot of the domestic policy establishment as well. And to come back to the core point, how are we going to save this republic? This is the debate in the conservative movement right now.

So this is a little bit, maybe a little bit spicy for some Republicans to sort of swallow right now. And my top focus is making sure that we win the election. But let's just move the ball forward a little bit and skate to where the puck is going here. OK, yes, let's say we win the election all as well and dandy. OK, what's the philosophy that determines how we govern?

So this is a little bit, maybe a little bit spicy for some Republicans to sort of swallow right now. And my top focus is making sure that we win the election. But let's just move the ball forward a little bit and skate to where the puck is going here. OK, yes, let's say we win the election all as well and dandy. OK, what's the philosophy that determines how we govern?

So this is a little bit, maybe a little bit spicy for some Republicans to sort of swallow right now. And my top focus is making sure that we win the election. But let's just move the ball forward a little bit and skate to where the puck is going here. OK, yes, let's say we win the election all as well and dandy. OK, what's the philosophy that determines how we govern?

There's a little bit of a fork in the road amongst conservatives where there are those who believe that the right answer now is to use that regulatory state and use those levers of power to advance our own pro-conservative, pro-American, pro-worker goals. And I'm sympathetic to all of those goals.

There's a little bit of a fork in the road amongst conservatives where there are those who believe that the right answer now is to use that regulatory state and use those levers of power to advance our own pro-conservative, pro-American, pro-worker goals. And I'm sympathetic to all of those goals.

There's a little bit of a fork in the road amongst conservatives where there are those who believe that the right answer now is to use that regulatory state and use those levers of power to advance our own pro-conservative, pro-American, pro-worker goals. And I'm sympathetic to all of those goals.

But I don't think that the right way to do it is to create a conservative regulatory state that replaces a liberal regulatory state. I think the right answer is actually to get in there and shut it down. I don't want to replace the left wing nanny state with a right wing nanny state. I want to get in there and actually dismantle the nanny state.